Indiana Chief Deputy Attorney General Lied about Grounds for Prosecution

Constitutional law prohibits prosecutors from requesting convictions against defendants for reasons other than their guilt. The following is an interview from 2013 when Chief Deputy Attorney General F. Aaron Negangard served as Dearborn County Prosecutor. Despite Negangard alleging that my convictions were based on true threats of physical harm and arson, Negangard made no such argument during trial. The altered grand jury transcripts, which were altered by the Dearborn Superior Court II, are void of Negangard giving any true threat instruction for my indictments. The quote scrolling across the top of the screen in the video is the argument Negangard made for my convictions.

The grand jury transcripts in my case demonstrate Negangard made me the target of a grand jury investigation in the absence of a crime. Negangard argued I made "unsubstantiated statements" about Dearborn Circuit Judge James D. Humphrey and Dr. Edward J. Connor, a psychologist often used by Dearborn County Courts. Negangard did not prosecute me for making threats of physical harm. Negangard made me a target of a grand jury investigation and prosecuted me for criticizing officials in the Dearborn County Court System. Now Negangard's new boss, Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill, is representing the Defendants in my lawsuit seeking the audio from the grand jury proceedings in my case. If Negangard presented a true threat ground for my indictments, Negangard had the true threat ground omitted from the transcription of the audio to deprive me of charging information. If Negangard failed to present a true threat ground for returning intimidation indictments, then the above video is further evidence of Negangard doubling down in Negangard’s efforts to retaliate against my First Amendment Speech. Now, Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill is saddled with the task of not only representing the defendants in my public records lawsuit, but Hill also bears the responsibility of keeping the records out of the public eye to protect F. Aaron Negangard, Hill’s Chief Deputy Attorney General.

More Examples of Grand Jury Abuses by Officials under Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill

In addition to changing the official record of grand jury proceedings, Chief Deputy Attorney General F. Aaron Negangard abused the grand jury process by viciously attacking and interrupting a grand jury witness whom Negangard claimed to suffer from psychological problems. That witness happened to be me. During opening arguments in my trial on October 3, 2011, Negangard read from a child custody evaluation released by Dr. Edward J. Connor on August 29, 2007:

“I'm going to read to you some findings about Dan Brewington because I think it's important to note that Dr. Connor hits the nail on the head when it comes to how he describes Dan Brewington…[Brewington] has a severe attention deficit disorder that affects his ability to focus and concentrate. He rambles and forgets, is given to impulsive and incoherent thought. He cannot communicate with the mother with the skills necessary to conduct joint custody. He also gave him a test. The test results said he had a degree of psychological disturbance that is concerning.” Trial transcript pg. 10

First thing to note is Negangard failed to mention the above referenced child custody evaluation recommended that I have near-equal parenting time with my 1 and 3-year-old daughters, which included overnights and weekends. If Negangard really believed I was unable to focus or concentrate and I rambled and forgot what I was saying, Negangard attempted to take advantage of my alleged disability during my voluntary testimony before the grand jury by constantly yelling at and interrupting me. If Negangard believed I was unstable, then Negangard tried his best to light the fuse. When I refused to be baited into Negangard’s trap, his tirades became so abusive that near the end of the below dialogue appearing in the grand jury transcripts, I tried to calmly address the members of the grand jury in an attempt to escape Negangard’s toxic attacks.

MR. NEGANGARD: And you didn't like his opinion either.

DAN: Well because, who?

MR. NEGANGARD: Judge Humphrey.

DAN: Well Judge Humphrey, well the problem was...

MR. NEGANGARD: Yes or no. Did you like Judge Humphrey's...

DAN: Well which opinion are you talking about?

MR. NEGANGARD: His final order.

DAN: The final order?

MR. NEGANGARD: Yes.

DAN: He terminated my parenting time with what Dr. Conner said...

MR. NEGANGARD: Well actually he didn't terminate your parenting time.

DAN: Yes he did.

MR. NEGANGARD: Did he?

DAN: Yes.

MR. NEGANGARD: No, he said, all you have to do, he said you have parenting time pursuant to, all you have to do is get a custody, is get a psychiatric evaluation.

DAN: That's why my case was on appeal. [Humphrey] said that he didn't have jurisdiction any more.

MR. NEGANGARD: [Humphrey] said all you have to do was get a psychiatric evaluation.

DAN: Yes and I was, I was, I tried to get a hearing for that and my hearing was set for June, June 14th...

MR. NEGANGARD: ...you never got a psychiatric evaluation. Correct?

DAN: It just got approved. It's Dr. [Lawlor] and uh, uh, well, let me back up. I had a hearing set for June 14th, it took a, by the final decree in my divorce, by the way there was no mentioning of terminating my parenting time.

MR. NEGANGARD: There was no mention of terminating your parenting time in the final decree.

DAN: Okay, what's the final decree say? Do I get any parenting time

MR. NEGANGARD: That you're not entitled to visitation. it doesn't say terminating visitation, now does it?

DAN: What's that mean? Did he terminate my visitation?

MR. NEGANGARD: No. Until you undergo a mental health evaluation. What is wrong with that?

DAN: Okay, then he terminated then...

MR. NEGANGARD: If you really cared about your children, why wouldn't you have gotten the evaluation?

DAN: Well because the burden of proof shouldn't be on

MR. NEGANGARD: ...if you really cared...

DAN: ...I did get an evaluation....

MR. NEGANGARD: ...about your children...

DAN: ...here's the problem...

MR. NEGANGARD: ...you didn't get an evaluation.. ,

DAN: Yes I did.

MR. NEGANGARD: No you didn't.

DAN: Because on March 13 th, March 17th, I had an attorney, well up until then, Judge Humphrey said he didn't...

MR. NEGANGARD: ...you represented yourself. Correct?

DAN: Well yes up until then, March 17 th, Judge Humphrey said he didn't have jurisdiction of the case because it was in appeal. I got an attorney. He filed a motion so we had a motion to approve a psychiatrist, a Dr. Henry Waite in Cincinnati where both me and my ex-wife reside and Judge Humphrey set a date, in fact, June 14, 2009 or 2010 Five days before that Judge Humphrey recused himself because of, this investigation I guess because I guess you spoke with him or somebody did.

MR. NEGANGARD: That was a long time after this order was issued.

DAN: Yes because he said that...

MR. NEGANGARD: You had plenty of time to get a psychiatric evaluation but instead you chose to appeal it. Correct?

DAN: Well that's the other thing it was he said I had to pay a hundred and twenty.-two thousand dollars ($122,000.00) for the future interest of a trust in farmland that I'm not entitled to so...

MR. NEGANGARD: But that wouldn't prevent you from getting a psychiatric evaluation so you could get your visitation...

DAN: Well I got a psychiatric evaluation. I got two (2) of them. I got one from a Hamilton County Court. I got one from Dr. Henry Waite. I wasn't allowed to bring those because I couldn't approve it. Here I got that...

MR. NEGANGARD: Isn't it true in your internet writings you said how you would not submit to a psychiatric evaluation?

DAN: That was at the very beginning because I was concerned. Okay, let's back up. The problem was, I wasn't given a copy of Dr. Conner's case file, which is...

MR. NEGANGARD: You got several documents...

DAN: Okay.

MR. NEGANGARD: ...you didn't get what you wanted. You didn't get your wife's stuff that you wanted to post on the....

DAN: I didn't get everything

MR. NEGANGARD: ...internet

DAN: ...I didn't get everything...

MR. NEGANGARD: Correct?

DAN: No. It had...

MR. NEGANGARD: ...so what...

DAN: ...nothing to do with that

MR. NEGANGARD: So what, you had this evaluation, you couldn't do a, you couldn't...

DAN: Mr. Negangard you got...

MR. NEGANGARD: ...no, I want you to try...

DAN: ...your facts wrong...

MR. NEGANGARD: ...and finally wake up. Everybody's at fault -- Judge Humphrey's at fault, Dr. Corner's at fault, Amy Streator's at fault, Tom Blondell's at fault, Mike Kreinhop's at fault...

DAN: ...see this is what he does...

MR. NEGANGARD: ...I'm. at fault, the Court of Appeals is...

DAN: ...that's what he does...

MR. NEGANGARD: ...at fault, the Indiana Supreme Court is at fault...

DAN: ...because that's what people like this do. They...

MR. NEGANGARD: ...is that whose all...

DAN: ...point at the person and say they're crazy.

MR. NEGANGARD: ...is that whose all at fault?

DAN: Well hold on.

MR. NEGANGARD: I mean because you've stated in your testimony that all those people are wrong and you're the only one that's right. Correct?

DAN: Let me just read this stuff real quick. Here's the history...

MR. NEGANGARD: Well answer the question. Are all those people wrong and you're the only one that's right? 

Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill was aware of the above conduct but instead of taking action to protect the public from abuses of the grand jury process, Attorney General Hill rewarded Negangard’s conduct with a promotion. If Hill did address my case with Negangard, Negangard probably just brushed it off as Brewington being crazy; however, if Negangard believed that I suffered from psychological disorders, then Negangard sought to take full advantage of my disability behind closed doors. If Chief Deputy Attorney General F. Aaron Negangard did not believe I suffered from the psychological dysfunction mentioned in Connor’s report, then Negangard knew I was correct in criticizing Dr. Edward J. Connor and Judge James D. Humphrey but made me a target of a grand jury investigation for doing so.

Therefore Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill does not want the Dearborn Superior Court II to release the full audio record from my grand jury proceedings. If the above is part of what Negangard allowed to be included in the record of the proceedings, there is no telling what information Negangard kept out of the record.

 Here is a link to more information regarding two separate court cases pertaining to the grand jury abuses committed by the right hand man of Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill. 

Summary Judgment: Two Legal Proceedings, The Same Abused Grand Jury

DEARBORN COUNTY, IN- In documents dated March 31, 2017, an Ohio man filed motions for summary judgment in two separate court cases involving accusations of grand jury record tampering. In 2011, Daniel Brewington was convicted of intimidation of court officials and served 2.5 years behind bars. The Indiana Supreme Court upheld Brewington’s convictions claiming Brewington’s critical internet speech contained “true threats [that] were carefully veiled” and did not enjoy first amendment protections. Now Brewington is suing for access to grand jury audio and seeking relief from his convictions. Grand jury transcripts demonstrate former Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard omitted a “true threat” argument from the record of the grand jury, while providing only an unconstitutional criminal defamation ground for indictments; leaving Brewington unable to mount a defense against the “true threat” ground the Indiana Supreme Court relied on to uphold Brewington’s convictions. In addition to being void of a “true threat” argument, the grand jury transcripts in Brewington’s case begin at witness testimony, requiring Negangard to either advise the court reporter to not record the entire proceedings, or to omit any opening arguments from the transcription of the grand jury audio. If Negangard failed to present a “true threat” ground for Brewington’s indictments, Negangard made Brewington a target of a grand jury investigation despite the absence of any criminal activity. Last year the Indiana Public Access Counselor issued an opinion deeming the grand jury audio to be a releasable public record and found the varying excuses for refusing to release the audio were invalid exceptions under Indiana law. Adding interest to the story is the fact Negangard now serves as Chief Deputy to Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill. In the lawsuit seeking the audio, Brewington has also requested the Court to disqualify Attorney General Hill’s office from representing the Defendants due to Chief Deputy Negangard’s involvement in the matter. Hill’s office is arguing the Dearborn Superior Court II is entitled to immunity from civil actions seeking public records. No hearings have been set on either matter.

The following are links to Brewington’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Petitioner’s Verified Petition for Post-Conviction Relief and Motion for Summary Judgment in Favor of Plaintiff/Motion to Disqualify the Office of Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill. Both motions include supporting memorandums.